As noted here previously, the Times Free Press has a perhaps unique policy of two editorial pages and two editorial policies ... sort of.
The Times has a left-wing fascist approach; the Free Press has a right-wing fascist approach.
Lee Anderson, long-time editorial writer for the right-hand pages, claims to be a strong supporter of the Constitution.
He is pretty consistently against further federal taxes (though he pretty consistently supports additional local taxes) and further federal encroachment ... unless his personal moral code calls for further federal encroachment.
For example, in an editorial on Sunday, 25 October, titled, "Wrong policy on marijuana," he takes to task the Obama administration for what seems to be its very first correct stand on legal matters.
Obama's attorney general Holder has decreed the feds will no longer violate the Constitution by harassing users of medical marijuana, at least in those states that have voted to legalize that particular herb.
Mr. Anderson's last paragraph reads, "Government cannot stop all illegal drug use, but its actions ought not to send the destructive, false message that drug abuse is OK."
Nowhere have I seen that Mr. Holder, or even Pres. Obama, endorses abusing marijuana -- they are too busy abusing taxpayers and citizens and Fox News.
But Mr. Anderson, handicapped by his superstitious Southern Christian background, fails miserably in being consistent, in being logical, in being rational.
To say "We won't throw you in jail because you have a different lifestyle or moral code from ours" is not the same as saying "Yeah, man, let's go wild and smoke that pot."
Forgetting for the moment that marijuana is less harmful than either tobacco or alcohol -- and obviously Mr. Anderson (who was probably there) has forgotten that alcohol once was itself illegal -- let's just carefully read the Constitution ... and we find there is not one word that allows the feds any authority to tell people they can't use marijuana, and especially is there not a word or syllable allowing the feds to override state laws on the subject.
Perhaps a foolish consistency is to be avoided, but it would be nice to find an intelligent consistency.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Doonesbury joins fray
Garry Trudeau, originator and probably still sometime writer of the "Doonesbury" cartoon strip, has jumped in to the fray with both feet in his mouth.
His strip of Sunday, 27 September, makes the claim that Hitler was the greatest evil in history.
As Al Smith might have said, let's look at the record: Most people believe Hitler killed six million people.
Actually, six million is the generally accepted figure for the number of Jews murdered.
There were at least twice that, counting other religious or ethnic victims.
Yet Stalin and Khrushchev murdered more than that just in (what was then known as the) Ukraine. I believe it was Harrison Salisbury who said the total number of Stalin victims was about 85 million.
Mao and the Chinese Communists murdered between 50 and 100 million!
Why, why, why do the American leftists seem never to admit there is evil on the left?
His strip of Sunday, 27 September, makes the claim that Hitler was the greatest evil in history.
As Al Smith might have said, let's look at the record: Most people believe Hitler killed six million people.
Actually, six million is the generally accepted figure for the number of Jews murdered.
There were at least twice that, counting other religious or ethnic victims.
Yet Stalin and Khrushchev murdered more than that just in (what was then known as the) Ukraine. I believe it was Harrison Salisbury who said the total number of Stalin victims was about 85 million.
Mao and the Chinese Communists murdered between 50 and 100 million!
Why, why, why do the American leftists seem never to admit there is evil on the left?
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Terry Stulce still not sane
One-time would-be candidate for Congress Terry Stulce has popped back out of the woodwork to write a letter to the editor, 23 September.
He would have been better served keeping a lower profile.
Once again, Mr. Stulce, of whom I used to think favorably, acts as the sock puppet to his ventriloquist masters in the Demagogic Party.
He has a letter referring to "the stench of racism," a nonsensical charge even the alleged victim of any racism has pooh-poohed. (As I have said elsewhere, President Obama is standing head and shoulders above his supporters, and not taken that very low road marched down by his boot-lickers and sycophants, especially those in the "news" media.)
Face it: The Demagogues have not a leg of logic, not a toe, to stand on and they must smear their opponents with their handiest brush. (Even Republicans are starting to look better by comparison.)
As I have said elsewhere, and will say again, Samuel Johnson's "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" is way out of date. Today, the last refuge of a scoundrel is "You are a racist."
He would have been better served keeping a lower profile.
Once again, Mr. Stulce, of whom I used to think favorably, acts as the sock puppet to his ventriloquist masters in the Demagogic Party.
He has a letter referring to "the stench of racism," a nonsensical charge even the alleged victim of any racism has pooh-poohed. (As I have said elsewhere, President Obama is standing head and shoulders above his supporters, and not taken that very low road marched down by his boot-lickers and sycophants, especially those in the "news" media.)
Face it: The Demagogues have not a leg of logic, not a toe, to stand on and they must smear their opponents with their handiest brush. (Even Republicans are starting to look better by comparison.)
As I have said elsewhere, and will say again, Samuel Johnson's "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" is way out of date. Today, the last refuge of a scoundrel is "You are a racist."
Friday, September 18, 2009
Foul-minded cartoonist further oversteps
Nasty and unintelligent, or perhaps dishonest, cartoonist Clay Bennett has joined the caterwauling chorus of leftist lunacy proclaiming the protests are "racist."
He really overstepped any bounds of decency with a cartoon (and he does draw well) of a protest crowd gathered around a burning cross.
Bennett is either a -- and I hate this word and its too-frequent use -- liar, knowing what he draws is untrue, or he is really super-stupid and he actually believes that nonsense, despite the proof to the contrary.
Take a look at this YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LejNkRd-3w
I'll bet Bennett won't even look.
Here's another site: http://www.project21.org/P21Index.html
He really overstepped any bounds of decency with a cartoon (and he does draw well) of a protest crowd gathered around a burning cross.
Bennett is either a -- and I hate this word and its too-frequent use -- liar, knowing what he draws is untrue, or he is really super-stupid and he actually believes that nonsense, despite the proof to the contrary.
Take a look at this YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LejNkRd-3w
I'll bet Bennett won't even look.
Here's another site: http://www.project21.org/P21Index.html
Response to e-mail
Reporter Emily Bregel has answered my e-mail, very cordially, too. (See "Tempest" post below.)
She does, though, persist in her belief her reporting was not partisan and she persists in her belief that her use of "debunked" was both not partisan and accurate.
I have replied to her nice note and hope she will continue our correspondence.
If she gives her permission, I will pass on what she said.
Cautionary note: Despite her courtesy, her cordiality, her attitude and her knowledge, or lack thereof, and that of other members of the "news" media, continue to hold our nation in peril.
Their firm belief that they know best, when in fact they don't know much at all, will likely be the downfall of our republic.
She does, though, persist in her belief her reporting was not partisan and she persists in her belief that her use of "debunked" was both not partisan and accurate.
I have replied to her nice note and hope she will continue our correspondence.
If she gives her permission, I will pass on what she said.
Cautionary note: Despite her courtesy, her cordiality, her attitude and her knowledge, or lack thereof, and that of other members of the "news" media, continue to hold our nation in peril.
Their firm belief that they know best, when in fact they don't know much at all, will likely be the downfall of our republic.
Friday, September 04, 2009
Argument by intimidation
Lacking any relevant evidence to the contrary, Times editors recently responded to an intelligent question with what must be considered, among other things, a foolish non sequitur.
An intelligent, but naive, letter to the editor took the Times robots to task for continuing to publish the columns of Paul Krugman: "How many letters do you need to get before you realize this guy is not an economist, but a left-wing extremist."
The crushing rejoinder from the Times editorial page editor: "Editor's note: Princeton economist Paul Krugman was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics last year."
Wow, there is certainly no comeback for that.
Q.E.D. Proof positive that every thought of Mr. Krugman is gold.
Yessir, there, right in front of us, is just further evidence of why newspapers are fast going the way of the dodo.
Oh, the letter-writer's naivete is that he seems to believe the Times would cease publishing something just because it is wrong and full of garbage. Hah!
That's the raison-d'etre for the Times.
An intelligent, but naive, letter to the editor took the Times robots to task for continuing to publish the columns of Paul Krugman: "How many letters do you need to get before you realize this guy is not an economist, but a left-wing extremist."
The crushing rejoinder from the Times editorial page editor: "Editor's note: Princeton economist Paul Krugman was awarded the Nobel Prize in economics last year."
Wow, there is certainly no comeback for that.
Q.E.D. Proof positive that every thought of Mr. Krugman is gold.
Yessir, there, right in front of us, is just further evidence of why newspapers are fast going the way of the dodo.
Oh, the letter-writer's naivete is that he seems to believe the Times would cease publishing something just because it is wrong and full of garbage. Hah!
That's the raison-d'etre for the Times.
Who's "mean-spirited"?
Not too many years ago, one of the pet smear words of the left was "mean-spirited," meaning, essentially, anyone, especially Republicans, who didn't go along with the latest trendy collectivist notion, and, worse, even dared to take a public stand in opposition.
Well, today "mean-spirited" is so very apt for the media left generally and, especially, for Clay Bennett, the nasty and not very intelligent cartoonist for the Times.
On Wednesday, 3 September, his pithy observation is a simple pair of snakes slithering around, one saying to the other, "Yeah, Dick Cheney makes my skin crawl, too."
This kind of mean-spirited hate doesn't really do much for civil discourse, doesn't add a thing to any kind of public discussion.
I wonder, often, how people like Bennett can sleep at night, and I'm sure he must have a beard because how could he look at himself each morning to shave?
Well, today "mean-spirited" is so very apt for the media left generally and, especially, for Clay Bennett, the nasty and not very intelligent cartoonist for the Times.
On Wednesday, 3 September, his pithy observation is a simple pair of snakes slithering around, one saying to the other, "Yeah, Dick Cheney makes my skin crawl, too."
This kind of mean-spirited hate doesn't really do much for civil discourse, doesn't add a thing to any kind of public discussion.
I wonder, often, how people like Bennett can sleep at night, and I'm sure he must have a beard because how could he look at himself each morning to shave?
Monday, August 31, 2009
"Tempest at town halls"
In the Sunday, 30 August, edition, that was the headline on a typical story. I wrote the reporter whose name was on it:
31 August 2009
Ms. Emily Bregel
ebregel@timesfreepress.com
Dear Ms. Bregel,
You did a pretty good job in your Sunday article on the “tempest” around the so-called health care reform proposals, but you stepped away from reporting into advocacy in one paragraph in particular.
You said, or perhaps an editor made you say, “… referring to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s widely debunked assertion that the Obama administration’s reform proposal would lead to government panels deciding to withhold health care for those deemed ‘unproductive.’”
There are several things wrong in that one partial sentence.
First, Sarah Palin is not the only person to make such a claim. Writings by Pres. Obama’s own medical adviser discusses, even advocates, exactly such a panel. If you need documentation, please let me know and I’ll send it.
In those countries and even states where some government or other controls health care, individual bureaucrats or groups of them are making such decisions even as we sit here.
Of course no one involved would call it a “death panel” and would, in fact, flinch from any such appellation, or even hint of such intentions. And possibly it really is an extreme statement of what is proposed … but it is not completely wrong.
Second, the assertion has indeed been widely opposed and even denounced but not disproved. If you want to talk about ideas that have been “widely debunked,” I offer you the notion of human-caused global warming. Thousands of scientists and philosophers have “debunked” the idea, but the notion still holds sway among politicians and journalists and indeed some other scientists, especially those dependent on government grants.
The terminology itself is not honest journalism. Merriam-Webster defines it thus: “to expose the sham or falseness of.” You, or an editor, take sides with such phraseology.
I spent too many years as a journalist myself to allow such partisanship to go unchallenged.
Finally, let me share with you this story of a government-run health-care system:
Disease vector — Though swine flu has yet to do much harm in the United States, it is not only Mexico and parts south that are suffering. The virus has spread quickly among the tribal villages of far northern Manitoba, accounting for one-quarter of that province’s sick. The urgency of the situation is compounded by many of the affected communities lacking a source of running water, making impossible the hygienic procedures necessary for containing the flu.
As one might imagine, getting vaccines to such remote locations is a daunting logistical challenge, and a demonstration of how poorly suited bureaucratic structures are for tasks such as delivering emergency aid. One might think, though, that the many layers of government devoted to ensuring Canadian health care could at least coordinate an airdrop of a case of hand sanitizer. But healthcare paternalism is way too advanced up north to roll back now; the Toronto Star (June 25) reports that “Health Canada had delayed sending alcohol-based hand sanitizers to some First Nations communities for fear some residents might drink it.”
So here we have a simple and cheap method for dealing with the virus among one of the poorest groups of people in the country, kept at bay by the fear that this method will speed the demise of chronic alcoholics whose lives already have less expectancy than those infected with the flu. The utter predictability of it all is telling; yet another giveaway that healthcare boards have far less interest in the public weal than in the perpetuation of their own power. — Andrew Ferguson
You will please note that this is not an attack on you, nor really an attack on what you wrote, or at least what had your byline.
It is, though, a plea that you try to avoid partisanship in the future, or try to urge your editor to avoid it.
If you have any questions on the subject or any aspects thereof, I will be more than happy to help you find the answers.
Thanking you for your time and attention, I am
Yours sincerely and respectfully,
Michael Morrison
31 August 2009
Ms. Emily Bregel
ebregel@timesfreepress.com
Dear Ms. Bregel,
You did a pretty good job in your Sunday article on the “tempest” around the so-called health care reform proposals, but you stepped away from reporting into advocacy in one paragraph in particular.
You said, or perhaps an editor made you say, “… referring to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s widely debunked assertion that the Obama administration’s reform proposal would lead to government panels deciding to withhold health care for those deemed ‘unproductive.’”
There are several things wrong in that one partial sentence.
First, Sarah Palin is not the only person to make such a claim. Writings by Pres. Obama’s own medical adviser discusses, even advocates, exactly such a panel. If you need documentation, please let me know and I’ll send it.
In those countries and even states where some government or other controls health care, individual bureaucrats or groups of them are making such decisions even as we sit here.
Of course no one involved would call it a “death panel” and would, in fact, flinch from any such appellation, or even hint of such intentions. And possibly it really is an extreme statement of what is proposed … but it is not completely wrong.
Second, the assertion has indeed been widely opposed and even denounced but not disproved. If you want to talk about ideas that have been “widely debunked,” I offer you the notion of human-caused global warming. Thousands of scientists and philosophers have “debunked” the idea, but the notion still holds sway among politicians and journalists and indeed some other scientists, especially those dependent on government grants.
The terminology itself is not honest journalism. Merriam-Webster defines it thus: “to expose the sham or falseness of.” You, or an editor, take sides with such phraseology.
I spent too many years as a journalist myself to allow such partisanship to go unchallenged.
Finally, let me share with you this story of a government-run health-care system:
Disease vector — Though swine flu has yet to do much harm in the United States, it is not only Mexico and parts south that are suffering. The virus has spread quickly among the tribal villages of far northern Manitoba, accounting for one-quarter of that province’s sick. The urgency of the situation is compounded by many of the affected communities lacking a source of running water, making impossible the hygienic procedures necessary for containing the flu.
As one might imagine, getting vaccines to such remote locations is a daunting logistical challenge, and a demonstration of how poorly suited bureaucratic structures are for tasks such as delivering emergency aid. One might think, though, that the many layers of government devoted to ensuring Canadian health care could at least coordinate an airdrop of a case of hand sanitizer. But healthcare paternalism is way too advanced up north to roll back now; the Toronto Star (June 25) reports that “Health Canada had delayed sending alcohol-based hand sanitizers to some First Nations communities for fear some residents might drink it.”
So here we have a simple and cheap method for dealing with the virus among one of the poorest groups of people in the country, kept at bay by the fear that this method will speed the demise of chronic alcoholics whose lives already have less expectancy than those infected with the flu. The utter predictability of it all is telling; yet another giveaway that healthcare boards have far less interest in the public weal than in the perpetuation of their own power. — Andrew Ferguson
You will please note that this is not an attack on you, nor really an attack on what you wrote, or at least what had your byline.
It is, though, a plea that you try to avoid partisanship in the future, or try to urge your editor to avoid it.
If you have any questions on the subject or any aspects thereof, I will be more than happy to help you find the answers.
Thanking you for your time and attention, I am
Yours sincerely and respectfully,
Michael Morrison
Monday, August 10, 2009
Paper publishes, encourages hate, dishonesty
Times cartoonist Clay Bennett is either dishonest or unintelligent ... or, to be fair, I guess he could be both.
Obviously he wouldn't have been hired for his position if he weren't a flaming leftie, but even for this excuse of a paper and even for this astonishingly stupid editorial page, Bennett is something of an extremist.
His Sunday, 9 August, cartoon, straight out of the talking points directive from the Democrat National Committee, shows the back of some speaker at a town hall meeting looking at an audience where all the signs say, for example, "Obamacare equals communism" and "Health care reform promotes euthanasia."
The caption reads, "Unfortunately, the town hall meeting was taken over by the village idiots."
One of the major problems with such leftists as Bennett is the unwillingness to grant either intelligence or knowledge or sincerity to their opponents; one of the other problems with such leftists as Bennett is their eagerness to set up straw men, who are, of course, much easier to knock down than the real opponents.
And it is much easier to knock down straw men than to deal with the issues, such as the obscene costs such government intrusion will have, or the total lack of any constitutional authority, or, most of all, the total immorality of such intrusion.
When such hatemongers as Clay Bennett are given access to such a podium, is it any wonder those who oppose further federal interference get angry?
Is such distortion by such hatemongers as Bennett going to help or just further such anger?
Obviously he wouldn't have been hired for his position if he weren't a flaming leftie, but even for this excuse of a paper and even for this astonishingly stupid editorial page, Bennett is something of an extremist.
His Sunday, 9 August, cartoon, straight out of the talking points directive from the Democrat National Committee, shows the back of some speaker at a town hall meeting looking at an audience where all the signs say, for example, "Obamacare equals communism" and "Health care reform promotes euthanasia."
The caption reads, "Unfortunately, the town hall meeting was taken over by the village idiots."
One of the major problems with such leftists as Bennett is the unwillingness to grant either intelligence or knowledge or sincerity to their opponents; one of the other problems with such leftists as Bennett is their eagerness to set up straw men, who are, of course, much easier to knock down than the real opponents.
And it is much easier to knock down straw men than to deal with the issues, such as the obscene costs such government intrusion will have, or the total lack of any constitutional authority, or, most of all, the total immorality of such intrusion.
When such hatemongers as Clay Bennett are given access to such a podium, is it any wonder those who oppose further federal interference get angry?
Is such distortion by such hatemongers as Bennett going to help or just further such anger?
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Not news: TFP run by incompetent morons
This is a letter to the editor, Sunday, 4 July:
Have we acquired another tyranny?
We are celebrating the independence of our country from England. How wonderful that there were such giants at that particular time. The courage, dedication, selflessness, and wisdom that it took to form our government were phenomenal.
Have we swapped one tyranny for another? It appears so. Without teaching history, how can our young know the true meaning of courage, sacrifice and independence? The government does not make jobs and create income. It doles out transfer payments from producers -- it just seems to come from the government.
To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, we cannot raise up one person by tearing down another. We are saddling our economy and our future with a debt from which we may not recover. We're penalizing our producers to benefit non-producers. We are hobbling our industry with costs and restrictions that our competitor countries are not dealing with. We're raising taxes and costs on people with the economy in recession. We have politicians trying to run bands, corporations and the government who've never even run a candy store.
Let's hope and pray the nation will come to its collective senses. I fear that it will not.
Save energy, paper and money -- get the Green Toolbar.
Don Moon
The incompetents at the TFP obviously don't even read their copy before sending it off to the presses.
And that's one more reason normal people don't read the raggedy paper.
I am trying to contact Mr. Moon to learn his reaction to the morons' adding that advertising line to his letter.
My guess is incredulity.
Have we acquired another tyranny?
We are celebrating the independence of our country from England. How wonderful that there were such giants at that particular time. The courage, dedication, selflessness, and wisdom that it took to form our government were phenomenal.
Have we swapped one tyranny for another? It appears so. Without teaching history, how can our young know the true meaning of courage, sacrifice and independence? The government does not make jobs and create income. It doles out transfer payments from producers -- it just seems to come from the government.
To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, we cannot raise up one person by tearing down another. We are saddling our economy and our future with a debt from which we may not recover. We're penalizing our producers to benefit non-producers. We are hobbling our industry with costs and restrictions that our competitor countries are not dealing with. We're raising taxes and costs on people with the economy in recession. We have politicians trying to run bands, corporations and the government who've never even run a candy store.
Let's hope and pray the nation will come to its collective senses. I fear that it will not.
Save energy, paper and money -- get the Green Toolbar.
Don Moon
The incompetents at the TFP obviously don't even read their copy before sending it off to the presses.
And that's one more reason normal people don't read the raggedy paper.
I am trying to contact Mr. Moon to learn his reaction to the morons' adding that advertising line to his letter.
My guess is incredulity.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
13th Amendment ignored if not repealed
In few words, it says, "1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
(Note, by the way, the reference to "their" jurisdiction. The Constitution was still acknowledging that these United States compose a union of sovereign states.)
"Involuntary servitude," in other words, is thenceforth, illegal.
Yet this story appeared in the TFP Saturday, 23 May, on Page A1: "Arrests near for jury-duty dodgers."
"Two Hamilton County residents will be arrested for failing to show up for jury duty, officials confirmed Friday.
"The arrest warrants are the first to be issued since Tennessee's new, tougher jury rules went into effect at the beginning of the year."
So, someone who finds it abhorrent to put another human being into a cage will himself be put into a cage?
Or someone who has been out of town and didn't get his mail is now subject to being jailed?
Or, even more basic, a citizen, a human individual, can be forced into being on a panel that might put another human being into a cage?
And what are the reasons for that caging? Perhaps that human being ingested some substance that doesn't have official approval?
Still, let me re-stress that basic point: How can a country that claims to be free in actuality force allegedly free human beings into servitude -- by definition involuntary servitude?
Jury duty is something an awful lot of people actually fear.
Probably tens of thousands of people across the country never register to vote purely out of the fear of being called for jury duty.
Now, of course, the statists and collectivists use driver license lists as well as voter rolls, and sometimes other lists, to find victims for the conscription.
Finally, consider the ridiculous contradiction of forcing people to be jurists, based on the paradox that the jury system protects freedom.
Probably that part is true: Juries can provide a bulwark against tyranny, as witness some great trials in history when the jurors refused to accept the court's orders, even risking punishment themselves to stand for right.
(I recommend you check into the Fully Informed Jury Association.)
Juries are, and are so told in, for example, Georgia, arbiters of both the law and the facts in any individual case.
But in far too many states, juries are lied to and told they must rule according to a judge's instructions, and phooey on the immorality or irrationality of any law.
Try, though, to volunteer for jury service. Try it.
In most states, if not all, that is not allowed.
Jurors are selected only from a bunch of coerced people who mostly don't want to be there.
Someone defined a jury as twelve people who are too dumb to get out of jury duty.
Very cynical, perhaps, but it is also a truism that lawyers often want the dumbest people possible on a jury.
There must be a better system. Coercion is always wrong.
Maybe someone reading this will offer a more reasonable plan.
(Note, by the way, the reference to "their" jurisdiction. The Constitution was still acknowledging that these United States compose a union of sovereign states.)
"Involuntary servitude," in other words, is thenceforth, illegal.
Yet this story appeared in the TFP Saturday, 23 May, on Page A1: "Arrests near for jury-duty dodgers."
"Two Hamilton County residents will be arrested for failing to show up for jury duty, officials confirmed Friday.
"The arrest warrants are the first to be issued since Tennessee's new, tougher jury rules went into effect at the beginning of the year."
So, someone who finds it abhorrent to put another human being into a cage will himself be put into a cage?
Or someone who has been out of town and didn't get his mail is now subject to being jailed?
Or, even more basic, a citizen, a human individual, can be forced into being on a panel that might put another human being into a cage?
And what are the reasons for that caging? Perhaps that human being ingested some substance that doesn't have official approval?
Still, let me re-stress that basic point: How can a country that claims to be free in actuality force allegedly free human beings into servitude -- by definition involuntary servitude?
Jury duty is something an awful lot of people actually fear.
Probably tens of thousands of people across the country never register to vote purely out of the fear of being called for jury duty.
Now, of course, the statists and collectivists use driver license lists as well as voter rolls, and sometimes other lists, to find victims for the conscription.
Finally, consider the ridiculous contradiction of forcing people to be jurists, based on the paradox that the jury system protects freedom.
Probably that part is true: Juries can provide a bulwark against tyranny, as witness some great trials in history when the jurors refused to accept the court's orders, even risking punishment themselves to stand for right.
(I recommend you check into the Fully Informed Jury Association.)
Juries are, and are so told in, for example, Georgia, arbiters of both the law and the facts in any individual case.
But in far too many states, juries are lied to and told they must rule according to a judge's instructions, and phooey on the immorality or irrationality of any law.
Try, though, to volunteer for jury service. Try it.
In most states, if not all, that is not allowed.
Jurors are selected only from a bunch of coerced people who mostly don't want to be there.
Someone defined a jury as twelve people who are too dumb to get out of jury duty.
Very cynical, perhaps, but it is also a truism that lawyers often want the dumbest people possible on a jury.
There must be a better system. Coercion is always wrong.
Maybe someone reading this will offer a more reasonable plan.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Pot suspicious of kettle
"Morley Safer," reads the headline, "suspicious of the blogosphere."
In the TFP of Thursday, 21 May, in the section called "People in the News" which is usually reserved to stories about show biz folks, is the Associated Press story about the "CBS News veteran" saying "he trusts citizen journalism as much as he would trust citizen surgery."
Safer, 77, "said good journalism needs structure and responsibility."
Most rational and knowledgeable people agree that CBS has been responsible, responsible for some mighty dishonest and biased reporting for a mighty long time.
From my childhood, CBS was known as the "Communist Broadcasting System" for its far-left orientation.
The only thing worse than the CBS bias was the CBS sanctimony when people expressed their belief in its bias.
To this day, the "Rather-biased" Dan tries to insist he believed his obvious forgery about George W. Bush's National Guard service, and swears it's true ... despite all the evidence.
Are there ignorami, paranoiacs, wackos, liars, and propagandists among the blogosphere? Yep. Just as there are among the CBS "news" people.
Which is not to omit NBC and ABC from this charge. ABC, for example, used to carry signs to '60s demonstrations to be sure it would have plenty to take pictures of.
With the blogosphere, though, we have a lot more options and we can make comparisons of some different perspectives we never get from those networks.
In the TFP of Thursday, 21 May, in the section called "People in the News" which is usually reserved to stories about show biz folks, is the Associated Press story about the "CBS News veteran" saying "he trusts citizen journalism as much as he would trust citizen surgery."
Safer, 77, "said good journalism needs structure and responsibility."
Most rational and knowledgeable people agree that CBS has been responsible, responsible for some mighty dishonest and biased reporting for a mighty long time.
From my childhood, CBS was known as the "Communist Broadcasting System" for its far-left orientation.
The only thing worse than the CBS bias was the CBS sanctimony when people expressed their belief in its bias.
To this day, the "Rather-biased" Dan tries to insist he believed his obvious forgery about George W. Bush's National Guard service, and swears it's true ... despite all the evidence.
Are there ignorami, paranoiacs, wackos, liars, and propagandists among the blogosphere? Yep. Just as there are among the CBS "news" people.
Which is not to omit NBC and ABC from this charge. ABC, for example, used to carry signs to '60s demonstrations to be sure it would have plenty to take pictures of.
With the blogosphere, though, we have a lot more options and we can make comparisons of some different perspectives we never get from those networks.
13th Amendment Repealed?
"Truant's parent given jail time," reads a front-page headline Thursday, 21 May.
In a story by the unfortunately named Chloé Morrison (not that there's anything wrong with "Chloé"), we are told a juvenile court judge in Marion County sentenced "the mother of a Whitwell Elementary School second grader to 48 hours in jail for not getting her child to school."
Here is the astonishing news, leading to the headline on this post: "School leaders said they are forced to crack down on parents of truant students because federal law requires schools to have high attendance rates."
Knowing the very low quality of "school leaders" in this part of the world, I suppose it is quite possible they actually believe the hogwash quoted here.
In fact, though, there is not one word in the U.S. Constitution that allows any federal official or agency to "require schools to have high attendance rates."
However, perhaps the gimmick is the one so many of us tried to warn about, the unconstitutional law that says, Obey our orders or we will cut your funding.
"School leaders" across this once-great nation have foolishly, and perhaps criminally, been suckered by the promise of "free money," and continue to pant and beg for it even after they learn about some of the catches, including having to match or more than match that "free money" and, worst of all, unquestioned obedience to the "education czars," although it is far less about education than about schooling.
Ironically, the "No Child Left Behind" concept was accountability, but the actual result has been obedience to educrats, far less knowledge among the youthful victims, and a huge growth industry in layers of bureaucrats among school districts across the country.
Neither the 13th nor the 10th Amendments allow such federal intervention, but the cowardice of "school leaders" has over-ridden the law.
In a story by the unfortunately named Chloé Morrison (not that there's anything wrong with "Chloé"), we are told a juvenile court judge in Marion County sentenced "the mother of a Whitwell Elementary School second grader to 48 hours in jail for not getting her child to school."
Here is the astonishing news, leading to the headline on this post: "School leaders said they are forced to crack down on parents of truant students because federal law requires schools to have high attendance rates."
Knowing the very low quality of "school leaders" in this part of the world, I suppose it is quite possible they actually believe the hogwash quoted here.
In fact, though, there is not one word in the U.S. Constitution that allows any federal official or agency to "require schools to have high attendance rates."
However, perhaps the gimmick is the one so many of us tried to warn about, the unconstitutional law that says, Obey our orders or we will cut your funding.
"School leaders" across this once-great nation have foolishly, and perhaps criminally, been suckered by the promise of "free money," and continue to pant and beg for it even after they learn about some of the catches, including having to match or more than match that "free money" and, worst of all, unquestioned obedience to the "education czars," although it is far less about education than about schooling.
Ironically, the "No Child Left Behind" concept was accountability, but the actual result has been obedience to educrats, far less knowledge among the youthful victims, and a huge growth industry in layers of bureaucrats among school districts across the country.
Neither the 13th nor the 10th Amendments allow such federal intervention, but the cowardice of "school leaders" has over-ridden the law.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Writers should know correct English first
Before trying to be cute, reporters and editors really should know the English language, then understand the variations and dialects.
In the fyiWeekend insert, the entertainment magazine published each Friday, there is this sentence in an article about the "Legendary Loretta Lynn," which she truly is.
"When Loretta Lynn sings about whooping a rival after her man ..."
"Whooping" is what certain cranes do, or perhaps partiers, along with "hollering."
What writer Barry Courter meant was "whupping," and if the TFP had any competent editors, that is what the printed article would have said.
There is also some confusion about just when the Loretta Lynn show will be: The final sentence says, "She said fans who come to the show Saturday will hear 'whatever comes to mind and whatever people holler out. That's what happens. We just let it happen.'"
Unfortunately, the schedule, in the inset box and earlier in the copy, says the show is Sunday.
If lots of people show up Saturday, the TFP could have an exclusive scoop, with photos of an angry mob.
In the fyiWeekend insert, the entertainment magazine published each Friday, there is this sentence in an article about the "Legendary Loretta Lynn," which she truly is.
"When Loretta Lynn sings about whooping a rival after her man ..."
"Whooping" is what certain cranes do, or perhaps partiers, along with "hollering."
What writer Barry Courter meant was "whupping," and if the TFP had any competent editors, that is what the printed article would have said.
There is also some confusion about just when the Loretta Lynn show will be: The final sentence says, "She said fans who come to the show Saturday will hear 'whatever comes to mind and whatever people holler out. That's what happens. We just let it happen.'"
Unfortunately, the schedule, in the inset box and earlier in the copy, says the show is Sunday.
If lots of people show up Saturday, the TFP could have an exclusive scoop, with photos of an angry mob.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Deserved mention: TFP gets TV Times right
This should have been written sooner. I'm often very quick to point out the errors and stupidities of the TFP, and therefore when it gets something right, I really ought to mention it just as quickly.
Well, after futzing around for weeks, and making the situation worse each time, the people in charge of the TV Times insert finally got the program listings right.
The magazine finally has figured how to keep the number of pages down but still list all the programs scheduled.
It continues with two pages for all the daytime programming but now manages to get in all the movies, such as on TCM and AMC, and other variations, such as at USA.
It took them a while, but By George they got it.
Well, after futzing around for weeks, and making the situation worse each time, the people in charge of the TV Times insert finally got the program listings right.
The magazine finally has figured how to keep the number of pages down but still list all the programs scheduled.
It continues with two pages for all the daytime programming but now manages to get in all the movies, such as on TCM and AMC, and other variations, such as at USA.
It took them a while, but By George they got it.
TFP's Department of Redundancies Department
Newspapers are slowly disappearing from our lives.
I would like to think that one reason is people's disgust with the general sloppiness and poor quality. I don't think it, but would like to.
If, though, the Times Free Press were losing readers because of linguistic incompetence, then it lost another batch with a headline of Wednesday, 13 May. The story is about the mini-city of Ridgeside, which somehow came into existence though entirely enclosed inside Chattanooga.
The headline: "Surrounded on all sides."
I would like to think that one reason is people's disgust with the general sloppiness and poor quality. I don't think it, but would like to.
If, though, the Times Free Press were losing readers because of linguistic incompetence, then it lost another batch with a headline of Wednesday, 13 May. The story is about the mini-city of Ridgeside, which somehow came into existence though entirely enclosed inside Chattanooga.
The headline: "Surrounded on all sides."
Monday, May 04, 2009
Hate surprising even for today's climate
People like Sean Hannity and Monica Crowley manage to personalize the political arguments and make them difficult ever to resolve.
But the right-wingers, even the most rabid, can't seem to equal in venom, in sheer nastiness the hate-mongering racism of certain leftists, especially one letter writer to the TFP.
In the Monday, 4 May, edition, one Rickey Spivey, Sr., makes this astonishing comment: "All right already, Columnist Thomas Sowell. Black and white folks get that you're the black journalist who doesn't agree with the black president. Uncle Tom would be proud."
This hate-filled ignoramus obviously knows nothing about Dr. Sowell, who is not a "journalist" but a scholar, author of dozens of books, and one of the most highly admired economists in the world.
Dr. Sowell, whom I have severely criticized (see http://morrisonhimself.blogspot.com/2005_06_01_archive.html, "Sowell sells out" and http://morrisonhimself.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_archive.html) started life in segregated poverty, and pulled himself up by his bootstraps, making himself into a highly educated and brilliant scholar.
Rickey Spivey, Sr., whose shriveled soul is destined for a place even hotter than a Chattanooga summer, concluded his screed with this paragraph: "You mentioned witch hunt and people being 'demonized' for disagreeing with the Homeland Security paper. Didn't Bush and the boys demonize people who disagreed with the war in Iraq? Now will be a great time to have a federal police force to keep those stay-at-home terrorists and you at bay."
Childish writing, fascistic ideology, and psychotic rhetoric all in one letter -- another reason the TFP is having to cut back on pages and staff.
But the right-wingers, even the most rabid, can't seem to equal in venom, in sheer nastiness the hate-mongering racism of certain leftists, especially one letter writer to the TFP.
In the Monday, 4 May, edition, one Rickey Spivey, Sr., makes this astonishing comment: "All right already, Columnist Thomas Sowell. Black and white folks get that you're the black journalist who doesn't agree with the black president. Uncle Tom would be proud."
This hate-filled ignoramus obviously knows nothing about Dr. Sowell, who is not a "journalist" but a scholar, author of dozens of books, and one of the most highly admired economists in the world.
Dr. Sowell, whom I have severely criticized (see http://morrisonhimself.blogspot.com/2005_06_01_archive.html, "Sowell sells out" and http://morrisonhimself.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_archive.html) started life in segregated poverty, and pulled himself up by his bootstraps, making himself into a highly educated and brilliant scholar.
Rickey Spivey, Sr., whose shriveled soul is destined for a place even hotter than a Chattanooga summer, concluded his screed with this paragraph: "You mentioned witch hunt and people being 'demonized' for disagreeing with the Homeland Security paper. Didn't Bush and the boys demonize people who disagreed with the war in Iraq? Now will be a great time to have a federal police force to keep those stay-at-home terrorists and you at bay."
Childish writing, fascistic ideology, and psychotic rhetoric all in one letter -- another reason the TFP is having to cut back on pages and staff.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
What? Defending the TFP?
No blog, probably no single public voice is as critical of the "news" paper as is this one right here, but, look, right is right, wrong is wrong, and blind stupidity is, yes, blind stupidity.
A letter to the editor, published Thursday, 23 April, is headlined "Slanted cartoons a daily onslaught." One might think it's a reference to the house editorial cartoonist, Clay Bennett, but no, this is what it says:
"I have been a subscriber to your paper ever since I moved to Tennessee. I, along with some other people to whom I have talked, are sick and tired of the daily political conservative slanted cartoons. Enough is enough! If this daily onslaught against our president continues, I will not be renewing my subscription. Not only that, I will be sure to address this issue with all of the Democratic offices in the state. ... When Mr. Bush was in office, you did not put such daily trash in the paper ..."
Ronald C. Merrill, of Dayton, Tenn., is listed as the author and in many ways I feel sorry for him. I mean, I'd hate to have my name in public attached to such ignorant nonsense.
Though it can't take credit for much, the TFP does deserve plaudits for one thing: Each day, and I mean seven days a week (so far), it runs two separate and different editorial pages.
Yes, on both sides, the editorials themselves are usually stultifying, boringly written, and betraying very little intellectual content.
But there ARE two pages, one "liberal" and one "conservative."
Though the Times side, the left page, carries mostly stultifying and dull (and often mean-spirited) columnists such as Ellen Goodman and E.J. Dionne, Jr., the right side will carry the brilliant Walter Williams, along with some not-so-brilliant columnists, too.
The left side has its own cartoonist, the aforesaid Bennett, and also carries the hate-filled Luckovich and others, but the point is this: Mr. Merrill is apparently blind as a bat.
A letter to the editor, published Thursday, 23 April, is headlined "Slanted cartoons a daily onslaught." One might think it's a reference to the house editorial cartoonist, Clay Bennett, but no, this is what it says:
"I have been a subscriber to your paper ever since I moved to Tennessee. I, along with some other people to whom I have talked, are sick and tired of the daily political conservative slanted cartoons. Enough is enough! If this daily onslaught against our president continues, I will not be renewing my subscription. Not only that, I will be sure to address this issue with all of the Democratic offices in the state. ... When Mr. Bush was in office, you did not put such daily trash in the paper ..."
Ronald C. Merrill, of Dayton, Tenn., is listed as the author and in many ways I feel sorry for him. I mean, I'd hate to have my name in public attached to such ignorant nonsense.
Though it can't take credit for much, the TFP does deserve plaudits for one thing: Each day, and I mean seven days a week (so far), it runs two separate and different editorial pages.
Yes, on both sides, the editorials themselves are usually stultifying, boringly written, and betraying very little intellectual content.
But there ARE two pages, one "liberal" and one "conservative."
Though the Times side, the left page, carries mostly stultifying and dull (and often mean-spirited) columnists such as Ellen Goodman and E.J. Dionne, Jr., the right side will carry the brilliant Walter Williams, along with some not-so-brilliant columnists, too.
The left side has its own cartoonist, the aforesaid Bennett, and also carries the hate-filled Luckovich and others, but the point is this: Mr. Merrill is apparently blind as a bat.
Might makes right?
With readership and, thus, income dropping, "news" organizations are seeking desperately for SOMEthing to write about, ANYthing.
Except, often, news.
When Texas Governor Rick Perry used the "s-word," secession, naturally the intellects in the "news" media were all a-flutter.
In the TFP of 19 April, an article from McClatchy Newspapers, but with no other byline, was headlined "Secession talk strikes a chord."
A clever opening read, "Texas Gov. Rick Perry appears to have given new life to the state's two decades-old tourism promotion -- Texas: It's like a whole other country."
Here is a paragraph from the middle of the story: "The fact is, the treaty under which Texas joined the union provides that it could be divided into five states. But it is not empowered to leave the union, a question settled by the Civil War."
So forget common sense, ignore logic, turn away from more intelligent and knowledgeable historians and Constitutional authorities and concentrate on one thing: The Yankees had more soldiers, more and better weaponry, and an industrial base from which to wage war like that of Attila and Genghis Khan, destroying farms and homes and burning private and public buildings and looting and leaving homeless women and children by the tens of thousands.
But they won, and therefore must have had God and St. George and all other Right on their side.
That, gentle reader, is what passes for "news" coverage these days.
Except, often, news.
When Texas Governor Rick Perry used the "s-word," secession, naturally the intellects in the "news" media were all a-flutter.
In the TFP of 19 April, an article from McClatchy Newspapers, but with no other byline, was headlined "Secession talk strikes a chord."
A clever opening read, "Texas Gov. Rick Perry appears to have given new life to the state's two decades-old tourism promotion -- Texas: It's like a whole other country."
Here is a paragraph from the middle of the story: "The fact is, the treaty under which Texas joined the union provides that it could be divided into five states. But it is not empowered to leave the union, a question settled by the Civil War."
So forget common sense, ignore logic, turn away from more intelligent and knowledgeable historians and Constitutional authorities and concentrate on one thing: The Yankees had more soldiers, more and better weaponry, and an industrial base from which to wage war like that of Attila and Genghis Khan, destroying farms and homes and burning private and public buildings and looting and leaving homeless women and children by the tens of thousands.
But they won, and therefore must have had God and St. George and all other Right on their side.
That, gentle reader, is what passes for "news" coverage these days.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Dishonesty in advertising
A full page insert in a recent edition of the TFP shouts, with large red capitals,
"DEFENDING
FREEDOM
DAILY
SINCE 1776"
Right below is a picture of the Constitution (which was written in 1787), beginning "We the People of the United States ..."
This from a publication that on a frequent, if not regular, basis omits needed facts, distorts others, and on one of its editorial pages, and sometimes both, calls for more and bigger government -- is that hypocrisy, fraud, or merely inconsistency?
"DEFENDING
FREEDOM
DAILY
SINCE 1776"
Right below is a picture of the Constitution (which was written in 1787), beginning "We the People of the United States ..."
This from a publication that on a frequent, if not regular, basis omits needed facts, distorts others, and on one of its editorial pages, and sometimes both, calls for more and bigger government -- is that hypocrisy, fraud, or merely inconsistency?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
